What Jimmy Johnson Taught Us About Fairness

Fairness is one of the most misunderstood concepts in leadership. Many equate it with treating everyone the same. Jimmy Johnson, former NFL head coach of the Dallas Cowboys and Miami Dolphins, disagreed. During his coaching days, he told his players, “I’m going to be very consistent—I’m going to treat every one of you differently.”

At first glance, that sounds contradictory because it flies in the face of society’s definition of fairness.

What Is Fairness?

Fairness isn’t sameness. It’s not about identical treatment—it’s about consistent principles. True fairness means upholding the same standards while exercising judgment based on individual circumstances.

Johnson illustrated this clearly in a well-known Dallas Cowboys story. He once cut a backup linebacker, John Roper, for falling asleep during a team meeting. Johnson stopped the meeting, turned off the projector, and told him on the spot to collect his things—he was done.

The media went wild, claiming Johnson was being “unfair,” that Roper was simply a scapegoat meant to motivate the team before a big game.

“What if it had been Troy Aikman?” they asked, referring to the Cowboys’ star quarterback.

Johnson reportedly replied, “Well, I would’ve walked back there, gently stirred him, and said, ‘Troy, wake up. This is important.’”

The media exploded again—because they viewed the moment in isolation.

The reality was that Roper, while talented, hadn’t shown commitment. He was late to practices, fined repeatedly, and lacked consistency. Aikman, on the other hand, had just come off a Super Bowl MVP season and consistently set the tone for the team.

The difference? Aikman had built a surplus in Johnson’s Bank of Trust. Roper was in the red.

The Trust Bank

Think of trust like a two-way bank account. Every time someone shows up prepared, meets a deadline, owns a mistake, or lifts the team’s performance, they make a deposit. Over time, those deposits add up to credibility, influence, and trust.

Every late arrival, missed commitment, or careless mistake is a withdrawal. A few withdrawals may not matter if the balance is strong—but for someone already overdrawn, even a small misstep can look like unfair accountability.

Leaders in business face the same thing every day. A top performer who’s invested deeply in their account may earn flexibility when needed. Someone who’s ignored expectations and drained trust doesn’t have that same margin. Both are treated fairly—but not the same.

But What If It Really Had Been Aikman?

In the NFL, the answer was clear: he’d have been nudged awake and told to pay attention. In business, it’s not always that simple. Companies must manage a different kind of risk.

High performers often earn more latitude—but when leaders make allowances for one employee and not another, they open the door to accusations of favoritism, discrimination, or “unfair treatment.” The underperformer may rewrite the story, claiming bias when accountability finally arrives. And in today’s environment, perception often carries as much weight as reality.

So how do leaders make the right call and maintain order?

Start with policy, documentation, and communication.

• Policy: Know your policies. They outline expectations and consequences to be applied consistently across the organization. You don’t have to treat every situation the same—but you do need to follow the policy.
• Documentation: Keep a record of both deposits and withdrawals—attendance, performance reviews, recognition, and corrective actions. Even a quick note or voice memo can create the “paper trail” that justifies your decisions.
• Communication: Accountability should never feel arbitrary. When leaders tie consequences back to clear standards and policies—and do so consistently—it reduces the perception of bias.

In short, companies can and should acknowledge the difference between an Aikman and a Roper—but within a framework that’s transparent, principled, and defensible if challenged.

When Does Fairness Become Unfair?

Fairness becomes unfair when leaders confuse uniformity with equity—when they apply the same consequence to very different situations in the name of keeping things “even.” That kind of leadership might feel safe, but it’s not courageous.

Real fairness requires judgment. It means holding everyone to the same standard, not the same treatment. It asks leaders to recognize both performance and potential—to reward trust earned as carefully as they enforce accountability when it’s lost.

As a leader, you’ll face moments when others won’t see the full picture. They’ll question your decisions, just as the media questioned Jimmy Johnson’s. When that happens, your best defense isn’t explanation—it’s consistency. If you’ve followed policy, documented your reasoning, and communicated clearly, time will prove your fairness.

Lead with discernment. Be consistent in principle, not identical in action. That’s the difference between keeping order and building trust—and it’s what separates managers from true leaders.